meta: permit Travis for doc-only changes instead of lite-pipeline CI job? #29770
Comments
|
@nodejs/tsc @nodejs/build @nodejs/releasers |
|
I have no objection but it would probably require changes to https://github.com/nodejs/node-core-utils as I don't think it currently looks for/at Travis results. |
|
Actually although we run the linters I'm not sure we build the docs or run the doc tests on Travis. |
|
+1 if we run the doc tests. On a side note, I’m ok with a specific github action. |
|
I'm +1 to doing this, as long as the necessary tests run on Travis. |
|
+1 as well. I'm in favor of doing a GitHub action only if there is a way to cache compilation artifacts, otherwise it's too slow. |
@richardlau node-core-utils always fails to notice Lite CI runs for me. It didn't always, but this started at some point not-too-recently. I can document the next time it happens if that's helpful. I assume it has been that way for everyone. |
@Trott Admittedly I've not tried it against a doc-only PR recently, but it has worked in the past (I've PR'ed fixes to it before, e.g. nodejs/node-core-utils#354). If you could document it the next time it happens it would be a very good step towards getting it fixed. |
Then again it looks like we haven't published a version of node-core-utils containing nodejs/node-core-utils#354 so it's quite possible you're running into the problem that fixes. |
|
We're now building docs on Travis, which has already caught one issue that we wouldn't have spotted on Travis before. |
Cool! And thanks for setting it up! So how do you think we should proceed, @richardlau? Do we prepare node-core-utils and test it out in a prerelease before changing the policy? Or just change the policy and let node-core-utils catch up? |
I would kind of like the tooling to work otherwise it just encourages people to ignore the warnings. But it would require someone to do the work there. On the other hand we do not require use of node-core-utils and haven't actually released a version of it containing stuff like the fix for pipeline job detection so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. |
|
nodejs/node-core-utils#469 will check for Actions result (and not Jenkins) when only doc files are changed. After it lands and is released we should be able to close this issue. |
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Doc-only changes don't need a full Jenkins CI, instead we can check if the last Actions run was successful. Therefore this commit also adds check for Action runs. Jenkins CI messages were improved as well. Fix: nodejs/node-core-utils#324 Fix: nodejs/node#32335 Fix: nodejs/node#29770
Does it make sense to update
onboarding.mdandCOLLABORATOR_GUIDE.mdto permit using Travis results for doc-only changes instead of requiring the CI lite-pipeline job? If that would be permissible, that might smooth the workflow a bit for landing doc PRs. (For one thing, the doc PRs will be land-able without someone manually starting a CI job.)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: